I worked on some stinkers, so let me tell you how it goes:
They build a game. Call it SuperGame. All new devs, all new code. Great. You've got a dozen testers on it writing bugs. Bugs are ranked A through D; D is little graphical things, A breaks the game.
At the start of the process, the dev team fixes all the bugs. But the closer you get to release, the less important D bugs become; they focus on A B and C. Then C becomes unimportant. Then B. Finally they'll only fix bugs that crash the game. At the end of the project, everything in the bug database is marked 'known shippable' and the game ships.
So the game launches and does well. They line up a sequel.
What do they do for SuperGame 2? They re-use the old code of course; it's got all your assets and whatnot. It's also got all your old bugs. They build SuperGame 2 on top of SuperGame 1, and get new testers to work on it.
So you're testing SuperGame 2, and you find a bug. Before you report it, you have to check the old bug database. If it's there, you ignore it. Why? Because if it was unimportant enough that the old dev team decided to ship the game with it, you can ignore it now. SuperGame 2 gets released, and has all the bugs from SuperGame 1 AND SuperGame 2.
Repeat this three or four times and you end up with a game that's absolutely riddled with so many stupid, low level bugs that it's a joke to play, but that the dev team keeps saying aren'timportant. The game gets panned, the studio gets fired (they hire the devs back later; this is just a stunt for the investors) and when they make SuperGame 5 they use new code and start the cycle over.
In short, don't buy EA games.
Tits for reading.
Attached: 1521173661591.jpg (500x625, 43K)